This is a special London edition of the Vegas Report covering the Vegas trends of the NFL International Series and their daily fantasy implications. For more of our weekly football content, visit our NFL homepage.
Last week I looked at all the Vegas data for the NFL games abroad and highlighted some prevalent patterns. With 10 years (18 games) of data for the London game, now is as good of a time as any to provide an update: For the second week in a row, we have a London game. It’s the London onslaught — “the Londonslaught” — as Jonathan Bales likes to call it. (My article, my version of Bales.) This year London has an unprecedented four games. This is how we punish the British for the metric system.
This week the Saints-Dolphins game kicks off at 9:30 AM ET and is included in a few slates, such as the Thursday night 16-game mega offering. All I have to say is this: Thank the fantasy gawds the Saints didn’t lose a game at the Coors Field of fantasy football to play a ‘home’ game at Wembley. That said, the Saints are favorites in London and Wembley is as friendly of a road/neutral field as the Saints could ask for in this matchup: The favorites have historically dominated in London. (Also, kindly ignore what happened with the Ravens last week.)
By the way, Sports Action has an article that looks at more Vegas trends for the London game.
Vegas Plus/Minus
I’ve created a Vegas Plus/Minus metric — similar to our proprietary daily fantasy Plus/Minus metric — that compares actual production with expected (or implied) production. When a team hits or surpasses its implied total (i.e., has a Vegas Plus/Minus of at least 0.00) then it has an implied ‘win.’ If it falls short of the implied total, I count that as an implied ‘loss.’
Favorites
The London favorites have historically crushed.
Over the 18 London games, the average implied total for the favorites has been a solid 24.44 points per game (PPG), which they’ve smoked with an actual score of 28.56, good for a +4.11 Vegas Plus/Minus on their way to a 14-4 implied record. Over the last half-decade (13 games) the outperformance by favorites has been even more extreme as they’ve scored 29.69 PPG for a +5.71 Vegas Plus/Minus and 10 implied wins — and that includes the recent seven-point performance by the Ravens.
Underdogs
In contrast to the favorites, who have massively overperformed, the underdogs have only marginally overperformed — and before last week’s 44-point outburst by the Jaguars the dogs were collectively in the Vegas red. Before the 2017 Jags, no London dog had outscored its implied total by more than 15.75 points.
Since 2007 the dogs have been implied for 19.42 PPG, finishing with 20.00 PPG for a +0.58 Vegas Plus/Minus and 7-11 implied record; since 2012, +1.37 at 6-7. The dogs haven’t been bad in London (especially recently), but they’ve been mediocre next to the favorites.
Over/Under
Offensive production within an NFL contest is often correlated across teams. As a result, many sharp DFS players stack games (instead of just teams) in guaranteed prize pools. To highlight teams that tend to play in games that hit or surpass the Vegas total, I’ve created an Over/Under Differential metric: The actual total of games minus their over/unders. The London games have provided some over/under value, particularly in recent years.
In total the London game is 11-7 on the over with a +4.69 Over/Under Differential. Since 2012, it’s 10-3 with a +7.08 on an average of 50.62 PPG scored. That’s some strong production. As you can see from the Vegas Plus/Minus data above, 87.6 percent of the excess production has come from the favorites (80.7 percent since 2012).
Point Spread
The spread is the go-to number for Vegas and DFS, as it is predictive of game script and outcome. As a result I’ve created a Spread Differential metric so we can see how teams have done on a PPG basis relative to the spread. Although there’s been a fantasy and over/under edge with the London game, there hasn’t been a strong edge in picking against the spread (ATS).
Since 2007, favorites are 10-8 ATS with a +3.53 Spread Differential; since 2012, 7-6 with a mark of +4.35. Although the ATS record isn’t impressive, the Spread Differential is significant as there have been a few London games in which the favorites have destroyed the underdogs by more than three touchdowns. When the favorites have covered, they’ve done so by an average of 14.5 PPG.
A Working Theory on the London Performance of Favorites (and the Jaguars)
Why do favorites tend to crush in London while underdogs underperform? I have a theory. The London game occurs under suboptimal circumstances: Teams travel 5-8 time zones east and have limited time to acclimate before playing a physical game that lasts for three hours. They also play in stadiums that aren’t well-equipped to handle football games: The grass surface is easily torn up, and the locker rooms are built to hold soccer teams, not NFL teams, which have more people and equipment.
My theory is that when two teams compete against each other in irregular and/or suboptimal circumstances, the one that suffers more because of situation is likely to be the one already disadvantaged on account of talent, coaching, etc. Of course, I could be wrong. We’re talking about a sample of only 18 games. What we see in the data could be nothing but noise. To wit, last week the Jags as underdogs beat the spread by a ridiculous 40 points.
Tangent: How does the Week 3 performance of the underdog Jags fit into my working theory of London favorites? Wembley is basically a second home stadium for the Jags, who have played there each year since 2013. If there’s any team that is used to the process of traveling and acclimating to and playing in London, it’s the Jags. Before last week, the Jags were 12-35 overall with Blake Bortles as the starting quarterback and yet 2-1 in London — and now they’re 3-1. It’s possible (as strange as this sounds) that the Jags have something of a home-field advantage in London because of the extent to which they are more familiar than their opponents with the London process.
But aside from this Jacksonville/London theory/phenomenon, I expect that the London unfamiliarity benefits the favorite more than the dog.
Saints-Dolphins Breakdown
The Saints opened as -2.0 favorites and are now at -2.5 and implied for a respectable 25.75 points. The over/under opened at 50.0 but it has moved down to 49.0 points even though 60 percent of the early bets have been for the over, suggesting that some big/sharp money is positioned on the under. I don’t like to go against the wise guys, but I’ll be curious to see where this line closes given the history of London game totals. It’s also worth remembering that every 2017 Saints game has hit the over so far.
Quarterbacks
Of all the fantasy options in this game, Saints quarterback Drew Brees seems the most enticing. Favored starting quarterbacks have done well in London, averaging 18.49 DraftKings and 17.00 FanDuel PPG with +2.79 and +2.43 Plus/Minus values on 80 percent Consistency Ratings since 2014. Dolphins quarterback Jay Cutler has some potential against a Saints defense that this year has allowed No. 2 overall fantasy marks of 24.8 DraftKings and 22.8 FanDuel PPG to opposing quarterbacks — but it’s hard to go with Smokin’ Jay and his 5.8 yards per attempt (30th of 32 qualifying passers). London underdog starters have Consistency Ratings of 30 and 40 percent on DraftKings and FanDuel.
Running Backs
It’s hard to trust the Saints running back triumvirate of Mark Ingram, Adrian Peterson, and Alvin Kamara. Ingram has played on just 49.2 percent of the offensive snaps and has negative three yards on his three carries inside the 10-yard line. The last game in which Peterson had even 3.7 yards per carry was in Week 16 of 2015. Kamara has 18 targets in three games and intrigues as a cheap pass-catching and change-of-pace option — especially on DraftKings, where his receptions and big-play ability have translated into a 100 percent Consistency Rating — but it’s hard to invest in a running back playing only 35.1 percent of the offensive snaps.
For Miami, Jay Ajayi is in play — especially at his discounted $7,400 DraftKings and $7,800 FanDuel salaries — but it’s fair to wonder if he will have his usual opportunities against the Saints. In Week 2, Ajayi had 28 carries and played on 94.1 percent of the snaps; Week 3, 11 carries and 52.4 percent. At the same time, he’s facing a Saints defense that’s allowing top-two production to opposing backfields with 36.0 DraftKings and 29.2 FanDuel PPG. The matchup doesn’t get better than this.
Wide Receivers
Saints wide receivers Michael Thomas and Ted Ginn Jr. and Dolphins wide receivers DeVante Parker, Jarvis Landry, and even Kenny Stills are notable — but this game is all about the return of the underappreciated Willie Snead. Fresh off suspension, he opens his campaign at just $5,000 DraftKings and $6,000 FanDuel. Only a few late-round/undrafted receivers have outproduced Snead to start their careers: Marques Colston, Wayne Chrebet, and Victor Cruz. If you’re playing the London game, use our Lineup Builder to create Brees-Snead stacks.
Tight Ends
Have you ever heard me talk in a British accent?
News Updates
After this piece is published, FantasyLabs is likely to provide news updates on a number of players highlighted. Be sure to stay ahead of your competition with our NFL news feed:
